Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scharf as part of US 4455118 A, hereinafter referred to as Scharf in view of Hren et al as part of US 20150147146 A1, hereinafter referred to as Hren.
Regarding Claim 1: Scharf teaches of A cable slack control system, comprising:
a frame assembly having a first end portion and a second end portion opposite the first end portion (Scharf: Fig. 6, support frame 20 comprises a first end denoted by support frame member 32 and a second end denoted by support frame member 28), wherein the first and second end portions are configured to pass a cable therethrough (Scharf: Fig. 1, cable 70 is demonstrated to pass the far end of support frame member 32 as it passes through sheave 36, and to pass through a slot in support frame member 28);
a first sliding carriage assembly movably coupled to the frame assembly and configured to slide between the first and second end portions of the frame assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, first guide member 60 is configured to slide between support frame members 32 and 28), the first sliding carriage assembly including a first pulley array assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7; Col. 2, line 53-57, sheave 52 is partially enclosed with in guide member 60 to allow for sliding movement),
a second sliding carriage assembly movably coupled to the frame assembly and configured to slide between the first and second end portions of the frame assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, second guide member 60 is configured to slide between support frame members 32 and 28), the second sliding carriage assembly including a second pulley array assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7; Col. 2, line 53-57, sheave 56 is partially enclosed with in guide member 60 to allow for sliding movement),
and a biasing member coupled between the first and second sliding carriage assemblies and configured to bias the first and second sliding carriage assemblies away from one another (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, cylinders 40 and 42 comprise actuator rods 46 and 48 respectively, which act to bias the first and second guide members 60 away from one another),
wherein the cable is configured to be wound alternately around the first and second pulley array assemblies (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, cable 70 alternately winds through sheave 56 and sheave 52).
Scharf does not explicitly teach of each pulley assembly comprising a plurality of pulleys.
Hren teach of a cable slack control system for a dragline style mining bucket, comprising a first and second pulley array, wherein the first and second pulley arrays comprise a plurality of pulleys (Hren: Paragraph 23, rope 62 can be wrapped multiple times over sheave 60; Fig. 2, sheave 60 is shown to comprise a plurality of sheaves to allow multiple wrappings of rope 62, or may include one or more rope).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the single pulley structure taught by Scharf with the sheave structure designed to accommodate multiple ropes as taught by Hren. Such a substitution would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of reducing the strain on the individual sheave or pulley that the rope is passing over to equalize the load (Hren: Paragraph 23, the ropes that support dipper 55 may comprise an equalizer to balance the load between the ropes and sheaves)
Regarding Claim 2: Scharf in view of Hren teaches of the apparatus described above in claim 1.
Scarf further teaches wherein the biasing member is a first biasing member, and wherein the system further comprises:
an intermediate support structure coupled to the frame assembly between the first and second sliding carriage assemblies (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, transverse support member 30 is coupled to frame 20 between support frame member 28 and support frame member 32),
wherein the first biasing member is coupled between the first sliding carriage assembly and the intermediate support structure (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, actuator rod 48 is coupled between first guide member 60 and transverse support member 30),
wherein the first biasing member is configured to bias the first sliding carriage assembly away from the intermediate support structure (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, actuator rod 48 is configured to bias first guide member 60 away from transverse support member 30);
and a second biasing member coupled between the second sliding carriage assembly and the intermediate support structure (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, actuator rod 46 is coupled between second guide member 60 and transverse support member 30),
wherein the second biasing member is configured to bias the second sliding carriage assembly away from the intermediate support structure (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, actuator rod 46 is configured to bias second guide member 60 away from transverse support member 30).
Regarding Claim 7: Scharf in view of Hren teaches of the apparatus described above in claim 1.
In light of the modifications described above in claim 1, Hren further teaches wherein each of the first and second sliding carriage assemblies includes between two and ten pulleys (Hren: Paragraph 23, rope 62 is able to comprise one or more ropes, which may be wrapped around the sheaves shown to be a part of sheave 60). While no exact number of ropes or pulleys to wrap them around is given by Hren, “one or more” encompasses at least two and as many as ten.
Regarding Claim 8: Scharf in view of Hren teaches of the apparatus described above in claim 1.
In light of the modifications described above in claim 1, Hren further teaches wherein each of the first and second sliding carriage assemblies includes between two and ten pulleys (Hren: Paragraph 23, rope 62 is able to comprise one or more ropes, which may be wrapped around the sheaves shown to be a part of sheave 60). While no exact number of ropes or pulleys to wrap them around is given by Hren, “one or more” implies a plurality of ropes, and therefore sheaves for those ropes to wind around, and as such, would be a results effective variable. In light of such a determination, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed would be motivated to utilize an appropriate plurality of pulleys or sheaves to achieve optimal stress distribution across the system, and as such arriving at a number of pulleys between four and seven would involve routine optimization of a results effective variable to achieve the desired load in each rope and pulley.
Regarding Claim 17: Scharf teaches of a device capable of accomplishing a method of controlling cable slack, comprising:
mounting a cable slack control system to a structure, wherein the cable slack control system comprises:
a frame assembly having a first end portion and a second end portion opposite the first end portion (Scharf: Fig. 6, support frame 20 comprises a first end denoted by support frame member 32 and a second end denoted by support frame member 28);
a first sliding carriage assembly movably coupled to the frame assembly and configured to slide between the first and second end portions of the frame assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, first guide member 60 is configured to slide between support frame members 32 and 28), the first sliding carriage assembly including a first pulley array assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7; Col. 2, line 53-57, sheave 52 is partially enclosed with in guide member 60 to allow for sliding movement),
a second sliding carriage assembly movably coupled to the frame assembly and configured to slide between the first and second end portions of the frame assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, second guide member 60 is configured to slide between support frame members 32 and 28), the second sliding carriage assembly including a second pulley array assembly (Scharf: Fig. 6-7; Col. 2, line 53-57, sheave 56 is partially enclosed with in guide member 60 to allow for sliding movement),
and a biasing member coupled between the first and second sliding carriage assemblies and configured to bias the first and second sliding carriage assemblies away from one another (Scharf: Fig. 6-7, cylinders 40 and 42 comprise actuator rods 46 and 48 respectively, which act to bias the first and second guide members 60 away from one another), routing a cable through the cable slack control system (Fig. 6-7, cable 70 alternately winds through sheave 56 and sheave 52).
Scharf does not explicitly teach of each pulley assembly comprising a plurality of pulleys.
Hren teach of a cable slack control system for a dragline style mining bucket, comprising a first and second pulley array, wherein the first and second pulley arrays comprise a plurality of pulleys (Hren: Paragraph 23, rope 62 can be wrapped multiple times over sheave 60; Fig. 2, sheave 60 is shown to comprise a plurality of sheaves to allow multiple wrappings of rope 62, or may include one or more rope).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to substitute the single pulley structure taught by Scharf with the sheave structure designed to accommodate multiple ropes as taught by Hren. Such a substitution would not fundamentally alter the individual elements of the inventions, to the predictable result of reducing the strain on the individual sheave or pulley that the rope is passing over to equalize the load (Hren: Paragraph 23, the ropes that support dipper 55 may comprise an equalizer to balance the load between the ropes and sheaves)
Allowable Subject Matter
After a complete and thorough search of prior art, claim 9 and all claims depending therefrom are in condition for allowance over prior art. Claims 3-6 and 18-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 3, while examples of shafts and biasing members coupled to sliding plates were found to be common in the art, there were no such examples found wherein the sliding plates included a plurality of apertures configured to slidably engage the shafts. Further, to combine prior art references to achieve this specific configuration would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 4 and 6, while examples of sliding carriages were common, and wherein rollers were common in sliding carriage assemblies, no such examples were found wherein the retention rollers of the sliding carriages were positioned below a plurality of pulleys, nor configured to keep the cable on the first plurality of pulleys, nor wherein the cable was configured to pass between the rollers. Further, to combine prior art references to achieve this specific configuration would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 5, while multi-pulley arrays are known in the art, there was no teaching or suggestion found to positively indicate that wherein individual pulleys arranged on a shaft would be free to rotate independently of one another. While there is implicit reasoning for this to be the case, there was no positive recitation of such an element in prior art references.
Regarding claim 9, while the limitations laid out can be read by some hypothetical combination of Scharf and Hren, there is la lack of motivation to suggest that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was properly filed to modify the apparatus of Scharf to act on a dragline style excavator, such as the one described by Hren. Modifying or combining these references would result in major alterations to the functionality and design of the individual elements of Scharf to accommodate use in a dragline bucket assembly as taught by Hren. To make such modifications would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 18, while many examples of cable assemblies are wound through one end, around a first pully/plurality of pulleys, and back out the other end, to modify the apparatus taught by Scharf in view of Hren to accommodate such an arrangement would fundamentally alter the design and structure of the individual elements of the inventions, and further, would rely on an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 19, while many examples of cable tensioning mechanisms were found that pass back and forth between two sets of pulleys, to modify the apparatus taught by Scharf in view of Hren to accommodate such a winding arrangement would fundamentally alter the design and structure of the individual elements of the inventions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Butler as part of US 5139206 A teaches of a tensioning apparatus that comprises a frame, the frame comprising a first and second end portion through which a cable is configured to pass through, a sliding carriage assembly movably coupled to the frame assembly and configured to slide between the first and second end portions of the frame assembly, the sliding carriage comprising a first plurality of pulleys, and a second plurality of pulleys, wherein the cable passes alternatingly between the two pluralities of pulleys.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN ANTHONY BREGEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0922. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 Eastern, M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher J Sebesta can be reached at (571)272-0547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EVAN A BREGEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights